Industrial structures frequently comprise wear components in parts of the structures that are subjected to erosion and wear. These wear components are designed to be relatively easy to replace when they wear out. An operator of such industrial structures often finds it advantageous to track information about the wear components used. This information can be used to operate the structure more efficiently. The operators can experiment with wear components from different suppliers with different designs or materials to find which work best in particular locations within the structure.
One industrial structure in particular need of tracking its wear components is a rotary cement kiln. A rotary cement kiln comprises a tube made from steel plate, and lined with refractory material. The tube slopes slightly (1-4°) and slowly rotates on its longitudinal axis at between 30 and 250 revolutions per hour. Rawmix (typically a mixture of limestone and clay or shale) is fed in at the upper end, and the rotation of the kiln causes it gradually to move downhill to the other end of the kiln. Fuel, in the form of gas, oil, or pulverized solid fuel, is blown in at the other end through the “burner pipe”, producing a large concentric flame in the lower part of the kiln tube. As the rawmix moves under the flame, it reaches its peak temperature, changing into clinker (alite and other compounds) before dropping out of the kiln tube into a cooler. A typical rotary cement kiln also has some auxiliary components such as preheaters. A typical preheater is designed as a “cyclone”—a conical vessel into which a gas-stream from the kiln tube is passed tangentially while the rawmix is fed in through the top of the cyclone.
‘Constructs’ and ‘build-outs’, as these terms are used herein, represent physical structures where multiple components (i.e., parts) are combined in intimate contact one to another. Components have one or more faces (i.e., surfaces), with a ‘cold face’ closest to the outer skin of the structure and a ‘hot face’ furthest from the outer skin. These components can be of the same material, though of different design; or conversely, similar design with different material. A ‘configuration’ represents a structure at a specific point in time, in which the components have specific designs and/or materials. A ‘build-out’ represents multiple, sequential configurations of the structure across time. One configuration of a build-out may have some components with different designs and/or materials than a configuration of the build-out at a different point in time. The entire build-out becomes an intimate composite of differing components and/or common components in varying arrangements. A Lego® structure would be an every-day example where design (i.e. shapes), properties (i.e. color) and components (i.e. gears, mini-figures, etc.) vary throughout the construct while comprising the finished composite. At any time a change in component design, color or arrangement can be made to the build-out, creating a different configuration. These changes might be for purposes of improvement, the ending of a component's useful life or perhaps by whim. Regardless, the documentation (e.g. where, when, with what) of such changes, even when internal to the structure, is desirable.
Previously, the evaluation of life-cycle economics of wear components has been performed using spread sheet or data base applications to store all descriptive data of the progressive re-design or repair of such build-outs (dimensions, physical properties materials, failure rates, installation dates, replacement dates, installation contractors, costs, etc.). Algorithms could query the data to generate solutions to assist in effecting continuous improvements to the economic life of the structure.
More recently, the data was enhanced with graphical 2D representations of historic or in situ configurations thru software such as that offered by WinBrix® and ECS/CemScanner® allowing the visual/spatial embellishment of the data returned from the software's algorithms. The 2D representations are represented via simple ‘developed surfaces’ (ones with zero-Gaussian curvature that can be flattened onto a plane without distortion) projecting the entire build-out in a single 2D view, color coded to represent different materials and their geometric relationship to each other (FIGS. 5 & 7). The ‘2D Method’ becomes cumbersome and eventually loses utility as shapes become more complex. The ‘2D method’ as programmed in these products limits itself to cylindrical surfaces. By definition, spheres and domes are not developable surfaces under any metric as they cannot be ‘unrolled’ onto a plane.
Both ECS/CemScanner® and WinBrix® can present a 3D orthogonal displaying the measured radiation loss (color coded) on a rotating cylindrical surface juxtaposed by an adjacent linear 2D depiction of the refractory configuration (See attached Graphical User Interface (GUI) images attached in FIGS. 6 & 8). Regarding non-cylindrical (non-zero-Gaussian) bodies, neither product models them, or depicts entity placement in 3D or manages composite (with stacked or ‘sandwiched’ components) build-outs or displays point-based historical data The ECS/CemScanner® package offers prediction of in situ component thickness (to highlight the concern about component reduced by wear), by correlating radiation loss measured with an infrared scanner to knowledge of the in situ configuration stored in its database.
What is needed is a method and system in which non-cylindrical (non-zero-Gaussian) bodies are modeled, depicting component placement in 3D, managing build-outs and displaying point-based historical data.